Rein says Microsoft and Sony are "both going heavily in that area."

Share this story

Those hoping that the spread of free-to-play gaming would slow down or halt in the near future won't be happy with what Epic Games Vice President Mark Rein is saying about the next generation of consoles.

Speaking at the Game Horizon conference in Newcastle, UK (as reported by Joystiq), Rein said point blank that "the next-gen consoles are going to be fully embracing the free-to-play and these IAP [in-app purchase]-type business models. So in case you don't know that, I'm putting that out there. Sony and Microsoft are both going heavily in that area."

When moderator Matt Martin from GamesIndustry International said there isn't evidence to back up this kind of talk from the console makers just yet, Rein responded, "Well, I'm telling you. I'm telling you what they're telling developers."

Free-to-play gaming isn't totally new to consoles these days. Toylogic released cutesy multiplayer RTS/brawler Happy Wars as a free-to-play title on Xbox Live Arcade last year, and Sony Online Entertainment released PS3 versions of free-to-play MMOs DC Universe Online and Free Realms last year as well. More recently, CCP's first-person shooter Dust 514 launched as a free-to-play title on PS3, and Namco has announced that the upcoming Ridge Racer Driftopia will be free to play on both PC and PS3. On the Xbox 360, Signal Studios is working on Ascend: Hand of Kul as a free-to-play RPG, and Microsoft itself is planning to release a free-to-play World Series of Poker title on Xbox Live and Windows 8.

Rein's comments seem to suggest that Microsoft and Sony are interested in further increasing the prevalence of free-to-play titles on their upcoming hardware. Zombie Studios has already announced that the PS4 first-person shooter Blacklight: Redemption will be free-to-play, and Sony Worldwide Studios chief Shuhei Yoshida told Game Informer recently that the studio is working on a "free-to-play type" PS4 game itself. Microsoft hasn't announced any such free-to-play plans for its next Xbox (or much of any concrete plans at all for the system), but the company has dabbled with free-to-play game publishing through last year's Microsoft Flight.

We know that free-to-play is a dirty word among a large segment of the Ars audience, but this isn't necessarily bad news for the future of console gaming. As the above-mentioned titles highlight, free-to-play is no longer synonymous with the casual and "social" clickfests that used to dominate the space. As long as developers can balance the game so paying for items doesn't mean paying to win, this kind of focus could lead to a lot of high-quality games that don't require players to shell out money up front.

Promoted Comments

Those of us who have been around awhile will remember the old shareware model which was essentially a free-to-play model with cash opt-in for more gaming. I remember, at the time, I would not buy a game I could not sample first. The Ouya is hopefully going to revive this model.

That said, having a free-to-play game in the current model of nagging you incessantly about buying more things is not something I will willingly participate in.

I dunno, in the last few years Free to Play has gotten a lot better. I mean there are still some atrocious ones out there, but a lot of new ones are coming out that are good to great. At this point merely see F2P as a different model, not inherently good or bad.

One thing I like about FTP games is that the good ones are constantly adding content so you'll keep playing them. And some of that content is free, so keep people feeling like FTP isn't Play-to-win (even when it is).

It's a nice model for worlds and games you want to be persistent, changing, and growing.

Now obviously not all games do this, or even most of them. But the ones that do I think work really well.

Share this story

Kyle Orland
Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area. Emailkyle.orland@arstechnica.com//Twitter@KyleOrl

Those of us who have been around awhile will remember the old shareware model which was essentially a free-to-play model with cash opt-in for more gaming. I remember, at the time, I would not buy a game I could not sample first. The Ouya is hopefully going to revive this model.

That said, having a free-to-play game in the current model of nagging you incessantly about buying more things is not something I will willingly participate in.

Those of us who have been around awhile will remember the old shareware model which was essentially a free-to-play model with cash opt-in for more gaming. I remember, at the time, I would not buy a game I could not sample first. The Ouya is hopefully going to revive this model.

That said, having a free-to-play game in the current model of nagging you incessantly about buying more things is not something I will willingly participate in.

I know why people don't like them, they hate the slow bleed. I agree. When I was a teenager I would have embraced the free model because I had more time than money and didn't mind a grind. So it's preferable to some.

I don't buy them now. I buy games that are $60 upfront and that's it. I'm sure I'm not the only one, the 'traditional' model will continue.

One thing I like about FTP games is that the good ones are constantly adding content so you'll keep playing them. And some of that content is free, so keep people feeling like FTP isn't Play-to-win (even when it is).

It's a nice model for worlds and games you want to be persistent, changing, and growing.

Now obviously not all games do this, or even most of them. But the ones that do I think work really well.

I dunno, in the last few years Free to Play has gotten a lot better. I mean there are still some atrocious ones out there, but a lot of new ones are coming out that are good to great. At this point merely see F2P as a different model, not inherently good or bad.

One thing I like about FTP games is that the good ones are constantly adding content so you'll keep playing them. And some of that content is free, so keep people feeling like FTP isn't Play-to-win (even when it is).

It's a nice model for worlds and games you want to be persistent, changing, and growing.

Now obviously not all games do this, or even most of them. But the ones that do I think work really well.

Yeah I was going to post this too. F2P to me is actually a model that supports multiplayer games much better than a buy-it-once deal.

I can try game before I buy it - which currently keeps me from playing a LOT of games I'm on the fence about. If I like a F2P game initially, I can spend a little money on it and find out if it's something I want to invest my time and gaming dollars in long term

And if the game is good and people keep spending money on it, they'll develop new content for it, keeping it fresh long term.

It started with add-ons to games, not so bad.Then to increase the amount of purchases the add-ons started having a bigger gameplay impacts.Then full sections of the game turned into day 0 purchases.Now the core gameplay is ruined by adding super tedious elements to get people to pay to skip.

It is so much fun getting a game where I have to buy all the levels, buy every powerup, and either waste hours slowly collecting experiences/coins or buy them. Is there even a game left anymore? It makes it so hard to even care about video games anymore.

Personally, I find the "play the first level for free, then pay to play the rest of the game" model far less distasteful than "We're going to nag you every 10 minutes to buy more e-gold to avoid the numerous pointless timesinks we've added to the game."

The shareware model is basically that the first portion of the game is the demo, and if you like it you can buy the rest of the game and continue your progress from the demo. The Free To Play model is more like they make the game crappy but if you pay real money you can make it less crappy.

One thing I like about FTP games is that the good ones are constantly adding content so you'll keep playing them. And some of that content is free, so keep people feeling like FTP isn't Play-to-win (even when it is).

It's a nice model for worlds and games you want to be persistent, changing, and growing.

Now obviously not all games do this, or even most of them. But the ones that do I think work really well.

Yeah I was going to post this too. F2P to me is actually a model that supports multiplayer games much better than a buy-it-once deal.

I can try game before I buy it - which currently keeps me from playing a LOT of games I'm on the fence about. If I like a F2P game initially, I can spend a little money on it and find out if it's something I want to invest my time and gaming dollars in long term

And if the game is good and people keep spending money on it, they'll develop new content for it, keeping it fresh long term.

That's what demos and expansion packs were for. But they didn't allow the publishers to milk the gamers the way F2P does.

One thing I like about FTP games is that the good ones are constantly adding content so you'll keep playing them. And some of that content is free, so keep people feeling like FTP isn't Play-to-win (even when it is).

It's a nice model for worlds and games you want to be persistent, changing, and growing.

Now obviously not all games do this, or even most of them. But the ones that do I think work really well.

This is a very important point with one caveat. Occasionally, you will see developers add content to maximize revenue rather than maximize the playerbase and continued growth.I have spent around $80 on MWO which is F2P and a lot of fun, but a majority of the content update for that game revolves around making new pay items. Obviously I've bought said pay items because I love the universe but the developer seems to be aiming for short term monetization rather than longer term growth & monetization.

Focusing on the long term is far riskier for the developer so I see why they're doing it. MWO has avoided the bigger problem which is P2W (pay to win) . From what I hear World of Tanks is a P2W F2P game.

I'd like to hear the opinions of LoL players regarding how F2P is working for them.

Oh yay, more games designed to be boring unless you buy 100 gold coins every few hours. At which point they will briefly become moderately less boring.

My issue with these games is that they tend to fill up online stores, and no store I've seen allows you to filter or hide them. Hell, google play doesn't even require that developers disclose in-app purchases in the description.

Free to play, pay to enjoy models need a lot more work for the consumer, which is already a bad place to start. Is it so hard to make a complete game from the get go? We're going backwards here - in theory dlc is the same as mini expansion packs, things you add on to a finished game, but a free to play model supports it as its backbone. In theory this would mean that users control what the value of each game is to them. In practice, I highly doubt it'll be that; much like the way dlc broke its theory to obvious financial gain with many negatives, so too will free to play.

I'll just do what I already do: wait for the completed game and buy it cheap a year or two later. The full game, not the pieces. And if they don't support that then they'll lose quite a few customers. Fact is there's a huge chunk of people who don't buy games within their first six months as they wait for sales or prices to drop. If the realistic cost is the same between them? They'll move on to something else that does. And if this goes to single player games, good luck controlling that.

The problem with most people's gut reactions for FTP games is they think of games like Farmville, or the recent Star Wars MMO....and yeah I am sure more of those types of games are going to pop up.But along with that you will also get some gems.Think Team Fortress 2, Tribes, PlanetSide, or DOTA2All FTP games that are not "pay to win" and keep people hooked into the games.Studios are already starting to realize that just because you make a game FTP and throw in some "pay to win" items doesn't make the game popular or money. You have to actually make *gasp* A GOOD GAME.I for one welcome more FTP games as it means more varied experiences for everybody to enjoy and have fun without feeling the pressure to "get my monies worth" like with a $60 game.

As long as I can block it, I'll be okay with it. Even Apple lets me go into the "Settings" app and completely prevent all in-app purchases without the use of an additional passcode beyond the password of the iTunes account. As long as Microsoft and Sony aren't worse about in-app purchases than Apple, this could be okay.

Still, I'm not sure I'll even get a next-gen XBox or PlayStation at all. I'm certainly not going to pre-order either one. When they hit the street, I'll read up on how actual people outside of the game industry talk about the experience.

If it's all too terrible, well, this is one place Nintendo consistently being a decade behind with online support could actually be a benefit. And then there's Ouya and SteamBox, increasingly looking like options that may actually work for me.

Free-to-play = Free unless you actually want to be competitive in multiplayer (see also: Tribes: Ascend, Team Fortress 2). You won't last 10 seconds in multiplayer unless you've ponied up for the top-tier weapons and armor

Free-to-play = Free unless you actually want to be competitive in multiplayer (see also: Tribes: Ascend, Team Fortress 2). You won't last 10 seconds in multiplayer unless you've ponied up for the top-tier weapons and armor

I honestly don't play Tribes, so I won't speak on that.But I can tell you from my many many many hours into TF2 that if you can't do well with the default weapons then getting the "paid" weapons(you know, the ones that also drop for free randomly) that getting those won't make you a better player.Hell most of the really good players I know actually stick to mostly the default weapons since they are the most well balanced.

Free-to-play = Free unless you actually want to be competitive in multiplayer (see also: Tribes: Ascend, Team Fortress 2). You won't last 10 seconds in multiplayer unless you've ponied up for the top-tier weapons and armor

As someone with less than zero interest in competitive multiplayer, I'm delighted to hear that.

Free-to-Play means free. The way game companies operate today, one can't just sign in and play on even grounds, they're required to "buy-stuff" to compete. No thank you to opening my wallet just to buy something that should have come with any "serious" game.

It is my most sincere wish that companies that use this business model push their board members and execs out the door and let the guys who code do their jobs the way they as gamers want them to.

It really depends on the game. RPG games I find F2P fits well, usually the pay for stuff is more end game or visual upgrades and doesn't effect gameplay too much. In these situations F2P serves as the introduction demo mode and if you really get into it you can start paying. The real issue I have is with things like shooters where pay 2 win comes in. Games like Tribes Ascend and APB really let me down because in order to really be the best you probably had to pay. APB was more of an offender, the best guns do cost money vs tribes where if you play forever you can eventually unlock them naturally. I feel like the main thing to avoid is forcing people to pay to even be able to compete with the people that do pay. This just creates a two tiered system and your free players start to leave.

Free-to-play = Free unless you actually want to be competitive in multiplayer (see also: Tribes: Ascend, Team Fortress 2). You won't last 10 seconds in multiplayer unless you've ponied up for the top-tier weapons and armor

Have you played either game? In TF2, all the weapons are sidegrades - you have to choose between different benefits and drawbacks, but there is no clear superior weapon. In Tribes: Ascend, it is right now easy enough to unlock a decent comp loadout from just playing over the course of a few weeks, and you can still be competitive with the default loadouts.

After playing Forza Horizon I think consoles have already embraced some concepts of free to play.

In that gave you can buy the ability to fast travel anywhere, treasure maps and tokens to buy cars which has been in the Forza series for a while.

While it didn't ruin my enjoyment of the game, it isn't something I am eager about.

I absolutely hate the nickel & dime "freemium" and Free-To-Play model that is used with alot of mobile games these days and it seems that is what is being fully embraced by consoles.

yes but in Horizon you can do everything naturally without paying a dime (aside from car packs of course). It involves you putting time into the game but well, I'm not seeing how that's a bad thing. Give those who want a shortcut a way to and let the rest of us do it the old fashioned way. It satisfies all sides of the discussion.

After playing Forza Horizon I think consoles have already embraced some concepts of free to play.

In that gave you can buy the ability to fast travel anywhere, treasure maps and tokens to buy cars which has been in the Forza series for a while.

While it didn't ruin my enjoyment of the game, it isn't something I am eager about.

I absolutely hate the nickel & dime "freemium" and Free-To-Play model that is used with alot of mobile games these days and it seems that is what is being fully embraced by consoles.

yes but in Horizon you can do everything naturally without paying a dime (aside from car packs of course). It involves you putting time into the game but well, I'm not seeing how that's a bad thing. Give those who want a shortcut a way to and let the rest of us do it the old fashioned way. It satisfies all sides of the discussion.

I disagree, what you call putting time into the game is really just grinding popularity, and unlocking outposts and grinding for money. This pure repetition exists just to push you to pay to make it go away, it adds nothing to game play and isn't the old fashioned way at all.

Avoiding the grind isn't a shortcut, other things like buying cars with real money on the other hand is.

As a I mentioned you can't fast travel to any point without paying, so you can't do everything naturally without paying a dime.

After playing Forza Horizon I think consoles have already embraced some concepts of free to play.

In that gave you can buy the ability to fast travel anywhere, treasure maps and tokens to buy cars which has been in the Forza series for a while.

While it didn't ruin my enjoyment of the game, it isn't something I am eager about.

I absolutely hate the nickel & dime "freemium" and Free-To-Play model that is used with alot of mobile games these days and it seems that is what is being fully embraced by consoles.

yes but in Horizon you can do everything naturally without paying a dime (aside from car packs of course). It involves you putting time into the game but well, I'm not seeing how that's a bad thing. Give those who want a shortcut a way to and let the rest of us do it the old fashioned way. It satisfies all sides of the discussion.

I disagree, what you call putting time into the game is really just grinding popularity, and unlocking outposts and grinding for money. This pure repetition exists just to push you to pay to make it go away, it adds nothing to game play and isn't the old fashioned way at all.

Avoiding the grind isn't a shortcut, other things like buying cars with real money on the other hand is.

As a I mentioned you can't fast travel to any point without paying, so you can't do everything naturally without paying a dime.

Well, welcome to games since forever. Grinding has been part of games as far back as I can remember so I don't see how a racing game can be immune from it. I enjoy it personally. I like finding the markers, I like redoing races for more money to buy more cars. I don't need a cheat sheet to find markers, etc. For those that do though more power to them and I don't see how that's a bad thing. You can buy every car in the game (again, aside from packs) without paying anything more than the cost of the original game. You can also fast travel to every outpost without paying a dime too. You finish the challenges needed and they go from costing in-game credits to travel to being free. Perhaps you've just never fully unlocked an outpost?

After playing Forza Horizon I think consoles have already embraced some concepts of free to play.

In that gave you can buy the ability to fast travel anywhere, treasure maps and tokens to buy cars which has been in the Forza series for a while.

While it didn't ruin my enjoyment of the game, it isn't something I am eager about.

I absolutely hate the nickel & dime "freemium" and Free-To-Play model that is used with alot of mobile games these days and it seems that is what is being fully embraced by consoles.

yes but in Horizon you can do everything naturally without paying a dime (aside from car packs of course). It involves you putting time into the game but well, I'm not seeing how that's a bad thing. Give those who want a shortcut a way to and let the rest of us do it the old fashioned way. It satisfies all sides of the discussion.

I disagree, what you call putting time into the game is really just grinding popularity, and unlocking outposts and grinding for money. This pure repetition exists just to push you to pay to make it go away, it adds nothing to game play and isn't the old fashioned way at all.

Avoiding the grind isn't a shortcut, other things like buying cars with real money on the other hand is.

As a I mentioned you can't fast travel to any point without paying, so you can't do everything naturally without paying a dime.

Well, welcome to games since forever. Grinding has been part of games as far back as I can remember so I don't see how a racing game can be immune from it. I enjoy it personally. I like finding the markers, I like redoing races for more money to buy more cars. I don't need a cheat sheet to find markers, etc. For those that do though more power to them and I don't see how that's a bad thing. You can buy every car in the game (again, aside from packs) without paying anything more than the cost of the original game. You can also fast travel to every outpost without paying a dime too. You finish the challenges needed and they go from costing in-game credits to travel to being free. Perhaps you've just never fully unlocked an outpost?

No grinding hasn't been in gaming forever. There is no grinding in Space Invaders, Street Fighter or Monkey Island.

Having to grind to unlock parts of the game was implemented to make games last longer, not to make them more fun. In some games you need to overcome challenges to unlock but that is not grinding. Grinding is forcing the player to keep playing past the point they want to. If you have to grind to unlock then it takes you longer to finish the game and thus it appears that the game has more "value" but that "value" is an illusion.